X-Message-Number: 32850
Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2010 08:04:31 -0400
From: "Perry E. Metzger" <>
Subject: Re: Identity is as Identity Does
References: <>

A couple of nits in Brian Wowk's recent email:
> In all that time there are two things I've never seen: (a) A truly
> new argument, and (b) Someone change their mind.

I've (partially) changed my mind over time on the topic, though I'll
be coy and not say in what direction.

> I have come to believe that the question of whether a
> computationally equivalent duplicate of a human mind (assuming
> equivalence in this context is even definable) constitutes a
> continuation of the original person may be objectively
> unanswerable.  It's almost a matter of taste, like alternative
> interpretations of quantum mechanics that assume different
> underlying realities that give exactly the same measurable results.

It may be that you are right on the subject of "continuity of
consciousness", especially absent any sort of rigorous definitions of
the terms of discourse.

However, QM is not quite so hopeless.  As it turns out, not all
interpretations of QM are externally indistinguishable. For example,
the GRW interpretation was recently ruled out by a sort of global
extension of Bell's theorem.

See: http://www.ams.org/notices/200902/rtx090200226p.pdf (and ignore
the paper's name, as it is deceptive.)

I note that the defenders of GRW have refused to surrender, but
others no longer care to listen to them much, just as Bell's Theorem
more or less wrecked the hidden variables crowd.

Methods to falsify or fail to falsify other interpretations of Quantum
Mechanics might also eventually be developed. I would not assume that
none can ever exist.

Perry
-- 
Perry E. Metzger		

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=32850